In the days of the Armada, a fleet of warships, the scuttlebutt was the rumor or gossip that would spread throughout the ship. Today, Armada Law Corp presents The Scuttlebutt, a daily summery of news articles that people within the cannabis, hemp and plant medicine industries are chatting about along with links to the full articles.
In today’s news:
#californiacannabis – “Butte County Director of Development Services Paula Daneluk gave an informational presentation to the board on Tuesday in which she broke down the county’s policies for medical cannabis as well as enforcement against farms that are not in line with local code in the latest program.
“This program has two goals in particular that we operate under,” Daneluk said. “The first of which is to maintain a year-round enforcement program that will successfully deter or eliminate the illegal cultivation of cannabis throughout the unincorporated areas of Butte County, and to work with law enforcement agencies in addressing commercial-sized cannabis grows or illegal grows that threaten to pollute water sources.””
#cannabisindustry – Pennsylvania – “In a request for relief and motion for a preliminary injunction, the growers and labs, led by Green Analytics North LLC, which does business as Steep Hill PA, told the appeals court that for the last six years, the state’s Medical Marijuana Act allowed growers to use a single lab for both stages, which allowed labs like Green Analytics itself to offer bulk discounts and other similar working arrangements.
The new regulation, published over the weekend, throws the existing system into disarray, effectively freezing the production and sale of medical cannabis in the state and creating shortages and increased prices, the motion argues, adding that blocking the regulation will restore the status quo.”
#californiacannabis – “The panel affirmed an April ruling from a lower court, which found that the couple didn’t show that the county singled them out in denying their permit.
The couple, Ann Marie Borges and Chris Gurr, attempted to prove that their marijuana was part of intrastate commerce and had asked the panel to consider past rulings and apply the current context of the legal status of medical marijuana in some states, court records show. But the panel said Monday it was not the appellate judges’ job to overturn or rewrite past cases, but rather the U.S. Supreme Court’s.
The judges said the current context of marijuana’s legality strengthens precedents such as Gonzales v. Raich, in which it was held that federal authorities can prohibit the local cultivation and use of marijuana in compliance with California law.”
#cannabislaw – “In a final initial determination released Friday, Chief Administrative Law Judge Clark Cheney explained his reasoning for recently clearing cannabis companies Greentank Technologies Corp., Marijuana Packaging and others of claims that their vape cartridge imports infringed a trio of patents held by Shenzhen Smoore Technology. The expansive 117-page decision invalidated one of the patents as indefinite and held that Smoore failed to satisfy the domestic industry element required by Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which prohibits the importation of infringing goods.
According to the filing, Smoore had relied on domestic expenditures of its importers and some of their customers to satisfy the economic prong of its domestic industry requirement. But Judge Cheney said that, “under the long-standing patent exhaustion doctrine, downstream sales are not protected by a patent.””
#cannabislaw – “In a notice of appeal filed Friday, the DOJ indicated that it would seek an appellate review of U.S. District Judge Patrick Wyrick’s February decision, which struck down a federal statute banning any addict or “unlawful user” of a controlled substance from having a gun.
In a 54-page decision, the Oklahoma federal judge said the law at issue amounted to an impermissible infringement on defendant Jared Michael Harrison’s constitutional rights.
“Here we are, with the federal government now arguing that Harrison’s mere status as a user of marijuana justifies stripping him of his fundamental right to possess a firearm,” Judge Wyrick said.
“This is not a constitutionally permissible means of disarming Harrison,” the decision said.”